Текст книги "Bureaucratic despair in Russia and global project “Obama”"
Автор книги: (IP of the USSR) Internal Predictor of the USSR
Жанр:
Политика
сообщить о нарушении
Текущая страница: 1 (всего у книги 5 страниц)
“On the present moment” № 11 (83), 2008.
Bureaucratic despair in Russia and global project “Obama”
CONTENTS
Russia’s place in the global crisis
1.1. Key question to Russian and foreign bureaucracy with an answer
Global financial crisis forced heads of number of states to gather for two meetings: first on November 13 and 14 in Nice in EU + Russia format and then on November 15 in Washington in the format of twenty most economically powerful countries. Judging by media reports even though both meetings paid significant attention to global financial system malfunction (subject was impossible to ignore), it did not deliver any worthy results, because delegates of both summits do not take into account and therefore do not discuss the fundamental principles of functioning of the system of global finances and credits. As consequence, no one either discussed a complex of alternative principles for building global system of finance and credits nor ways of switching to them without revolutionary and post-revolutionary shocks, all aimed at eliminating even the possibility of such crisis’s occurrence in the future.
Therefore G-20 summit in Washington turned out to be just pointless talks, for which none of the delegates would be accounted for, and it ended with same in its essence pointless declarations of goodwill, even though all participants might be sincerely convinced that they have completed a big deal of preparation work and in the summit’s course produced constructive results guaranteeing an overcoming of the current crisis and economic prosperity of the humanity.
“The leaders of the Group of 20 nations, including the world's richest countries and such major developing economies as China, Brazil, India and Russia, issued a joint statement and detailed action plan after their meeting Saturday pledging to take a variety of steps to combat the current economic crisis and make sure it doesn't happen again.” – reports .
In this article Martin Crutsinger, a corresponder of Associated Press agency, lists key points of the statement and the action plan.
According to the delegates, the root of the crisis lies in the fact that investors did not fully recognized the risks involved in their actions. “Part of the problem stemmed from the fact that the global economy had been doing so well for so long that that investors were lulled into a false sense of security.” – states the author, pointing out that this joint statement does not actually acknowledge the boom of high risk mortgages in the USA, which many believe to be the epicentre of the current crisis.
In the statement the leaders took an obligation to, when necessary, continue money transfers from central banks to commercial ones, aiming at restoration of normal lending and at stimulation of consumer demand, states the newspaper. According to them, Bush’s administration was opposed to these new pricey obligations especially now, in the times when USA budget is deep in deficit.
Mr. Crutsinger also mentions the improvement of regulation mechanism: G-20 leaders agreed on establishing before March 31 2009 a number of “supervisory colleges” which will include all major regulators of financial system from all over the world and which will meet regularly to discuss the state of largest banks, operating in several countries[1]. The article also says that the participants pledged to improve regulation of derivatives.
In addition The Washington Times reports that the leaders agreed to quickly expand the “Financial Stability Forum” organization encompassing high-rank officials, management of central banks and regulator-agencies from a number of countries.
Leaders stated that International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank need to be comprehensively reformed to give more influence to developing countries and to expand the duties of IMF in economic monitoring of countries, mentions the author.
“Concerned that this severe financial crisis not lead to the same beggar-thy-neighbor trade policies that contributed to the Great Depression, the group pledged to refrain from erecting new trade barriers for the next 12 months” newspaper reports.
G-20 leaders pledged to meet again before April 30th 2009 and gave their ministers of finance an extensive list of measures to be taken before the next summit, concludes the newspaper ().
Many expected Washington summit to be sort of second Bretton-Woods (back then world leaders met to discuss post – WWII depression which resulted in creation of current financial system, oriented to US dollar as global currency). Gordon Brown, UK prime minister, held especially high hopes for such turn of events. However, breakthrough did not happen, delegates only outlined agenda for the nearest future. The only consolation to Brown was probably the fact that the next G-20 meeting in March 2009 which might bring the breakthrough might take place in the UK.
Dimitry Medvedev did not expect this summit to repeat Bretton-Woods, but in his speech he pointed out that “now world is in need for the ideas as powerful as decades ago”. Here is one of the many ideas expressed by the president before the summit: to establish an international organization of “recognized and independent “financial gurus””. Another one – make G-20 a main coordinator of reforms and development of global financial system – was supported in Washington. Consequently countries forming G-8 were named responsible for global financial security architecture.
Summit’s final declaration encompasses general principals for financial markets reform and tasks that all members of G-20 should give to their ministries and experts. Reformation plan also includes measures to be taken both in short term (before March 31 2009) and in mid-term. Those measures will affect standards of financial accounting, increasing requirements to rating agencies, management of risks. Declaration also mentions that Bretton-Woods financial organizations should undergo complete reformation. This concerns in the first place IMF and World Bank. For example, it has been decided to analyze if their resources are sufficient and to increase them if necessary. IMF will also inforce it’s role as a consultant in macro-economic policy[2].
All of the above show typically bureaucratic approach:
a problem forced the biggest layer of international bureaucracy to gather in order to take measure towards this problem’s resolution
however, bureaucrats themselves are not completely competent in the field and therefore could only direct financial resources and delegate problem resolution to the group of “financial gurus”, which come to think of it, has itself created the problem last year – same financial specialists were acting in the field of monetary exchange and providing consulting services to the same bureaucrats.
On October 12 2008, on the eve of the Nobel prize in economics winner’s announcement, a “news of the weeks” informational tv-show on Russian tv-channel “Rossia” dedicated it’s air time to financial crisis that has taken over the world. There was an attempt to figure out what was the role of Nobel prize in economics winners in the course of global economic processes. As a result, Nobel winners Harry Markowitz (USA) (also shared the prize in 1990 with Merton Miller and William Sharpe “For their pioneering work in the theory of financial economics”) and Robert C. Merton (USA) and Myron Scholes (Canada) (shared together the prize in 1997 “For the nez method to determine the value of derivatives”) were explicitly declared the creators of current economic crisis, because it was precisely them who theoretically proved the harmless nature of speculative machinations for the global economy, which reality proved were exactly the causes of crisis.
However information on pseudo-Nobel laureates, creators of global financial crisis, presented in Sunday (October 12th) news report on tv-channel “Rossia” was only an extended version of the report passed on the news of the First Russian tv-channel of October 5th 2008 (.).
None the less, blaming current crisis on Nobel prize winners is quite superficial in its essence. This crisis is not a result of evil intention or incompetence of pseudo-laureates of Nobel prize, to whom trusted honest stock brokers and bankers, but it is a purely a logical outcome of fundamental principles of organization of monetary exchange in liberal bourjois West, principles that spread throughout the world, which turned this crisis into global disaster.
Since above mentioned economists and those winners of pseudo-Nobel prize in economics that have not been named here all are pretty far from resolving such issues as economical provision of human prosperity, then the only question to D.A. Medvedev and other participants of G-20 summit in Washington is as follows:
How do you – bureaucrats – intend to distinguish
“gurus” that are actually competent in the matters of organization and management of regional and global macroeconomic systems and therefore have the ability to resolve this crisis once and for all
from those “gurus” that with their thorough research and findings have actually paved the way to current mess
– provided that your own education in economics is either non-existent or of the same quality that those of the mentioned pseudo-Nobel laureates, and when you yourself are not willing to go into trouble of looking into the root, studying economic problematic and inadequacy of prevailing schools of economic science?
Unfortunately bureaucrats do not face the question of how to tell an efficient professional from efficient talker only posing as professional, and this problems concerns not only economic domain. And this is the major problem of societies that rendered their governance power to bureaucratic apparatus . Sadly, post-soviet Russia is not an exception here.
Who will be chosen into this international committee of financial “gurus” by G-20 bureaucrats if this suggestion will be put into practice – only time will tell. However one cannot hope neither that these “gurus” will be more capable of efficient functioning than above mentioned pseudo-Nobel laureates in economics nor that those chosen will produce “powerful ideas” which will lead world economy to the mode of crisis-proof functioning because:
Firstly, economic theories of the West are meant to solve radically different problems. Example of that are Nobel laureates’ theoretic “proves” that the crisis was impossible and that pumping speculative “hernia” of economy is absolutely safe for the real sector, for the sphere of consumption and political stability, which only allowed those managers of “hernia” achieve their goals and cause the crisis
Secondly, bureaucracy is notable for its inscrutable “wisdom” and therefore does not need side ideas that in its content do not adhere to morals and opinions of authoritative “gurus” supported by bureaucracy.
As history of economic degradation of post-soviet Russia shows, its bureaucracy finds only defective “gurus” in its pursuit to solve its publicly declared goals of country’s modernization, poverty elimination and increase of wellbeing of its population, and not only multiplication of assets of oligarchs and other “elite” (including bureaucratic elite, which quotes its salary based not on its achievements).
If bureaucrats continue clinging to such approach to the problem, the matters will only become worse. None the less president D.A. Medvedev in his “Address to the Federal Assembly of Russian Federation, November 5th 2008” declared:
“We should not delude ourselves that the economic crisis is anywhere near over yet. We need to keep our wits about us throughout this period and pay close attention to the effectiveness of our work and the justification of our new plans and programs. This applies to the state, business, and to each individual.
I am sure that we will manage to resolve all of these difficulties and will soon put in place a modern and independent financial system able to withstand any external challenges and ensure stable solutions to its own tasks.” ()
This last passage is particularly interesting because before stating anything of that sort it is necessary to:
Unveil the flaws of current credit-financial system
Work out principles of building a credit-financial system free from the flaws of the current one
Prepare a transition plan from the flawed system to improved one
Prepare executive resources that will be able to function efficiently in the new system
Find ways and means to retire representatives of current executive apparatus which would not be able to conform to the new system
Otherwise the statement is nothing but empty words which will never lead to realistic results.
1.2. Kingdom divided against itself…[3]
On the contrary to the leading countries of West and East who managed to successfully develop their economies in the past ten years after 1998 crisis Russian society accepted conditions of socio-economic crisis as a way of life for many years since back-stage junta hiding behind M. S. Gorbachev came into power. None the less Russia has also been affected by current global financial crisis and has to find means to recover from it.
A few weeks ago Russian prime-minister V.V. Putin asked business community the following question: When oil prices in the world are falling why then in Russia oil and petrochemical products prices are not following the trend?” Russian petrochemical market responded to the question posted by the head of parliament by lowering prices, in particular: petrol prices dropped 1-2 rubbles per litre (5-8%).
Due to the fact that oil and its products are included in price-list basis – fall in its prices opened opportunities for manufacturers and sellers of goods (in conditions of lack of solvent demand on products with earlier announced prices) to be able to lower their prices not risking bankruptcy, and therefore support manufacturing and consumer exchange of goods in conditions of monetary deficit in times of financial crisis. But these opportunities were immediately eliminated by Central Bank of Russia.
“Bank of Russia (Central Bank or CB) demonstratively decreased by 30% rate of Russian ruble to currency basket and – when traditionally right anti-crisis measure is considered to be interest rate decrease. CB’s official explanation to such measure – the need to fight outflow of the capital – did not convince analytical experts” (source: ).
Reduction in Russian currency exchange rate improves situation for export but only worsens it for import. If this measure is adequate to public needs in situation when Russia imports up to 70% of food supply and even bigger part of industrial good – is an open question. To answer it we must analyze balances of goods exchange and financial statements of both external trade and internal inter-industrial and inter-regional commerce. But there is not doubt that Central Bank is not trusted anymore to manage Russian ruble exchange rate in the best interest of socio-economic development or Russia since CB became a “state within the state” in 1991.
Interest rate increase creates additional debt, which we know we will not able to pay and that is aimed at worsening the crisis and destroying V.V. Putin’s influence on stabilization of oil products market.
It does not matter if Central Bank’s actions are manifestation of bad intentions of its perverse comprehension of the nature of macroeconomic processes, the consequences are all the same – crisis aggravation.
Besides for one more time it became clear that Russian bank sector as a whole (and not only CB) is not influenced by patriotism: commercial banks that received government aid to overcome liquidity crisis[4] immediately distinguished themselves in the banks statistics by increasing purchases of foreign currencies and transferring financial assets on overseas bank accounts, although financial aid was given to support the real sector of Russian economy. Then representatives of the real sector started to complain that they were having hard times in obtaining credits and in consequence were forced to save money by decreasing production volumes, cutting salaries and laying off people. Hence crisis is spread through chains of exchange of goods both in real sector and in end-consumption sector.
Correspondingly one of the problems of overcoming the crisis in Russia consists in overriding Central Bank and whole banking sector to the state and its crisis recovery policy. This task might prove to be more difficult than “forcing Georgia to the peace”.
But main problem is inadequacy of historic science, sociology and economics, which is supported and reproduced by educational system in these fields, by Russian Academy of Science (RAS), Higher Attestation Committee (HAC) and scientific councils that award candidate and doctorate degrees in history, sociology and economics – those are the “gurus” officially acknowledged by state officials[5] as intelligent and competent professionals. And as we know those are big on giving advices…
Because crisis is primarily a manifestation of intellectual and creative bankruptcy of historically formed social science, in order to advance in development our country needs to:
Turn RAS into community of interest, suspending its unofficial status of “ministry of science”
Annul already awarded degrees of candidates and doctors of science and HAC and respective science councils were dismissed for being useless[6]
Deviate from historically formed educational standards, primarily in history, sociology (inc. psychology and economics). Those need to be qualified as giving students an opportunity to learn about alternative opinions and views. It is only through such sort of deviation from standards that new knowledge, adequate to new needs of social development, can be introduced in the system of development of new generation of specialists.
On the one side abolition of scientific degrees will free many people from necessity to waste enormous amount of time and effort on writing dissertations and participating in its defense procedures, even more because dissertation defense is only a basis for receiving “official statements” to the fact that degree-holders are certified “know-it-all’s by default” [7] . On the other hand this measure will force at least part of officials to stop covering their expensive irresponsibility (funded by tax-payers) with science degrees and titles of brought in “guru”-consultants, and try to understand on their own the heart of the matters and learn to tell real professionals and experts whose advice can be trusted from those sweet-talkers who take “consulting” for if not a horn of abundance than at least for guaranteed free lunch.
Besides, as we mentioned in analytical note of IP USSR “It is not worth making the same mistake twice” in the series “On the current moment” № 11 (71), 2007, “socio-economical theories of liberal-bourgeois nature are principally not suited for realization of “Putin’s Plan”, because rise of Russia as a great state and major player of global politics is deeply repugnant and unacceptable for leaders of liberal-bourgeois West. Therefore based on liberal-bourgeois sociological and economical principles, these theories will inevitably become legal cover for political sabotage of “Putin’s Plan” by liberal-bourgeois branch of masonry”
This is exactly what is happening at the moment: Russia was affected by the crisis “thanks to” its economic science, to its officials ideologically dependent on the science, to its banker and stock brokers and to its morally rotten “elite” in general. And now, actions of state officials, banking and stock moguls in Russia only aggravate the crisis, which in the best case scenario will slow down realization on “Putin’s Plan” if not kill it in the bud because current management will lead the country to full-on economic disaster. On the day when G-20 started its summit in Washington, newsru.com source published the following information:
“Judging by the poll of working Russians about 30% of companies were affected by the crisis: 9% of the respondents say that their employer had delayed salary payments, 6% indicate that there have been a few cases of lay-offs[8]. At the same time 60% of employed respondents(35% of all respondents) sate that their colleagues and employees of various companies have not experienced any effects of the crisis. In addition, sociologists of point out that these figures haven’t changed in the past week.
At the same time monitoring of personal well-being of respondents (in their own opinion) shows that for now only insignificant number of Russians were personally affected by the crisis. Today, according to FOM’s research, 37% of polled state that in the past 2-3 months state of their personal finances has worsened. Here sociologists point out that even before the crisis (in summer and in the beginning of autumn) this indicator has been constantly at 30% mark.” ().
Those “powerful ideas”, necessity of which declared D.A. Medvedev in Washington, have already been voiced by Concept of Public Safety (CPS) organization, but were ignored by the regime since parliamentary hearings in 1995. Apparently the regime does not need them. And massive preparation of executive and governmental personnel is and will still be carried out based on ideas that were proven harmful.
And this is despite the fact that lingering crisis of post-soviet society in Russia obliges the state to educate executive personnel not based on new ideas (whether already published or not formed yet, but in some way alternative to traditional thinking) but based on methodology of figuring out new ideas adequate to current reality by each individual facing one or another problem.
For now, the regime have not taken any measures as to lead the country out of algorythmics of development of times of troubles, which was described in analytical note of IP USSR "Time of troubles: its origin, rise, overcoming…” from “On the present moment” series #11 (59) 2006. The regime continues leading the country to the collapse of “mass-elite” culture. And the regime cannot avoid responsibility and say that it has no knowledge about it: photograph on the left shows , First Deputy Chief of Staff of V. Putin’s Administration as he holds one of the issues of above mentioned article. As you can see the issue is in quite large format (A3 paper to be exact) and designed in contrast colors (designed to be noticed) – so obviously such article can be either ignored or taken into consideration.
To learn more about similarities in personalities of V. Putin and see analytical note of IP USSR “Egoists are doomed to be and die as slaves…” in the “On the present moment series” #5 (65), 2007.
To comment on it in the light of the events happened after it was printed – it is necessary to add that the beginning of the end of reign of B. Godunov was an economic crisis – several years of bad harvest, that caused famine in many regions of the country. Then B. Godunov opened state granary to the people, but was not able to organize efficient allocation of the grain. It resulted in quick rise of mass speculation, possibly fueled by Godunov’s political opponents, which only aggravated the situation. Very soon after that Godunov died and (not taking into account 4 years long reign of V. Shuisky, a.k.a. ) Russian tsardom was taken over by a man who called himself Dimitriy and who according to the prevailing belief of historic community was playing the role of somebody he was not (in other words )
There are two main reasons for the fall of Godunov’s regime:
On the one hand – he was not practicing violent elimination (“slaughter”) of his political opponents, which was the favorite practice of (also he was one of the contestants in “Name of Russia” project, the analogue of “100 Greatest Britons”)
On the other hand – Godunov failed to establish his own pool of personnel, which he could have trusted to help him move “un-slaughtered” political opponents from the field of politics to more “domestic” activities
In addition, ordinary people at the time were not interfering with politics, being too involved in their “domestic/routine” issues, but were actively spreading nonsense and irresponsible rumors “he killed the little tsarevitch (young heir)…”.
As a result – the uprise of Time of troubles
Possibility that financial crisis will put an end to Putin-Medvedev regime is also a hope of their many political opponents (inc. G. Kasparov, B. Nemtsov and others). And therefore it seems logical that the opposition and its allies (both inside Russia and abroad) will make a lot of effort to advance development of current economic disaster. In this connection economic ignorance of state officials and many entrepreneurs may well become both an instrument and a cover for well calculated sabotage in order to stop which it is objectively necessary to turn to stronger measures, then just verbal admonition and appeals to the conscience and common sense of saboteurs and fools-their allies; and even more so – not years-long court trials which only serve to feed parasite-attorneys such as G. Reznik – those are not adequate measures to stop sabotage (measures have to be quick and efficient).
In connection with this though we would like to quote an analytical note of IP USSR from December 31 2007 “On discharge of destructive anti-Russian matrix”, which a year ago explicitly warns:
“But the rumors that all evil events of the past are the fault of “Godunov” – is a “humanist factor”, which is capable of rising the trouble only in the specific sub-section of Russian intelligentsia. In order to motivate sufficient number of people to raise trouble one thing is necessary – financial crisis and inevitably following it – socio-economic crisis, which is capable of wrecking “Putin’s Plan”: we need to remember that even having state debt, due to the efforts of Putin’s regime the situation in the country is rather stable, but private entrepreneurs were put into such conditions that for many years it was more profitable for them to take credits in foreign banks[9].”
In other words – the history is repeating itself, at least on the surface:
The regime principally does not “slaughter” its opponents
There are no signs of establishing executive personnel pool, based on new alternative ideas and principles, which is necessary for “pushing” the fools and saboteurs into “domestic” routine
Meanwhile, simple people are occupied by the same “domestic routine”, not interfering into “tsars business”, but spreading nonsense and irresponsible rumors: “Buildings in Moscow were blown up to start second Chechen war; they served polonium-flavored tea to Litvinenko, potential opposition to the regime; they killed truth-seeking Politkovskaya; they bankrupted “Ukos” and are “marinating” prisons ardent idealists-opponents – Khodorkovsky and pregnant Bakhmina, meanwhile they rob the people and hide money in offshore accounts…”
What in that situation is done by means of non-public politics, carried out based on discipline of internal corporations, special services and their periphery in the society – is still an open question, which everyone answers to the degree of their own perception of the world and understanding of it.
But in looking for such kind of answers it is utterly important not to turn one’s own thoughts into the ranks of conspiracy theories.
None the less the regime will face the consequences of its actions, because personnel is a crucial factor. And personnel that received inadequate education and having flawed morale and ethics will do harm…
In addition the people are not entirely innocent in their financial suffering – every nation deserves the leaders that they either purposefully chose or let them be chosen…
And God does not help those who do not help themselves
2. «Obama» – a project of global deceit
2.1. Why Obama and not someone else? — Some aspects
2.1.1. Aspect of internal politics
One of the key factors of existence and development of every society is its psychological spirit or dominant – optimistic or pessimistic one. If pessimistic spirit prevails in a society for long period of time or several generations then this society will face not only problems in its development but also the issue of its survival in general.
If we were to compare Russian and American societies using this factor then the result will not be in favor of Russia:
American society is in many ways dynamic because it is optimistic. Ask any American how he/she is doing and almost every one will respond “fine/great/terrific”. And even if his/her life is very far from perfect or even disastrous he/she will stick to the norms of society and would never off-load his/her pessimism on the collective subconscious. Russians are completely different case
Ask anyone living in Russia how he is doing and his answer will vary from total pessimism– “worse then ever”– to very careful optimism – “well, nothing special, trying to survive”. And in this age of reform Russian mass media set the ton for pessimistic dominant. E.g. when Masha Gaidar, a host of “Echo of Moscow” radio show “Special opinion” on November 11 2008 asked her guest, well known publicist and humorist Victor Shenderovitch the following question: “How do you view our future during this financial crisis” he immediately responded “I don’t see anything good”.
Here the matter is not in introducing moral bans on “crying on the shoulder” of someone who can help or at least console the “crier”, but in the fact that one should not complain about his/her life, outpouring pessimism and therefore spoiling algorithmic of collective unconscious. And in relation to this cultural norms of USA are more socially safe.
All precedent presidents before Obama – were not just random people, meaning that all of them come from “elite” clans, and some of them (according to press) are heirs of Merovingians, just like Western European monarchs and therefore go way back in their genealogy to David and as it is perceived – directly to Jesus Christ.
